72 hour to refuse

[cdsea10]

is there any specific code, regulation, ucc section that specifically states one has 72 hours to return a presentment that is spoken of so often... the 3 day, 10 day 30 day windows?

[J.W.]

This is a common misunderstanding which has become a mythology.

Search this forum for an article posted somewhere entitled "Truth In Lending Act Mythology" as it may better clairfy things for you.

[weishaupt1776]

Yup, just kick back and devote some more well spent time in researching rather than being enslaved by

"The Tale of the 3 Day Time Limit"

[David Merrill]

I found it over a decade ago in the State of Colorado adoption of the UCC. I doubt it has been removed. It is a fundamental principle of contracting. If an agent comes into your dominions contracting you have three days to Refuse for Cause.

On the other hand if you go into a shop and buy something, it is up to the shopkeeper whether to refund or not.


Regards,

David Merrill.

[J.W.]

David,

Although I am not certain for sure of what you speak entirely however, it may be plausable.

However, those who consistantly assert that TILA Reg. Z is to be cited or is cited as the authority for such are wholeheartedly incorrect. All they would have to do is just read the darn code section and they would (at least I would hope) determine such...

J

[David Merrill]

Originally Posted by Jason Whitney

David,

Although I am not certain for sure of what you speak entirely it may be plausable.

However, those who cosistantly assert that TILA Reg. Z is to be cited or is cited as the authority for such are wholeheartedly incorrect. All they would have to do is just read the darn code section and they would (at least I would hope) determine such...

J

I am of quite an opposite school than you mention. If you really start bugging me for proof there is a 72 hour stipulation in the UCC I may go find it for myself and then if it seems productive, share it here. In other words I will not resort to the Lex Mercatoria (Law Merchant) or its codification the UCC since before I triggered the Montana Freeman Standoff. By simply resorting to the common law concepts, Without Recourse, and no UCC citation like the folks getting honor for the Comptroller Warrants in FRNs, I imposed a codification-free forum of law upon the Federal Reserve; something they would have had to undo all the spin since the War Between the States to honor.

One time a suitor (before he met me) got a curbside bid for a new roof on his home. He said he might get back to that contractor as he accepted the presentment. Four days later he came home to a new roof!

I bought an expensive vacuum cleaner about twenty years ago. Then I realized that even though it was a great vacuum cleaner, at $1200 it was far from a great deal. So I wanted out. The attorney had me convinced that was okay but kept stalling and not returning calls until three days later he informed me my three day grace period to renege was over. The pushy salesman insisted we give him our old vacuum cleaner and he cut the cord off it ceremoniously. This was a tactic to impress upon me and my wife that the deal was final and there was no backing out.

I have been squabbling with Redemption and other Acceptance for Value UCC folks for years. There are some great theoretical scenario "scripts" to be formed from the UCC, I agree. So good that people jump on the "There was a guy in Texas who had the Note returned..." And then, "I know a guy in Texas who can prove..." It is a little bit scary. I have talked with a lot of people and even drafted remedy for them that have believed that somewhere, a black-robed attorney caved into the power of the UCC rules. I have yet to talk to one of these advocates who ever saw it happen or even has a certified transcript of it happening.



Regards,

David Merrill.

[J.W.]

David,

What I was referring to more so in reponse to what you had posted was again restating that the TILA 72 hour myth was just that, a myth. I have to find the quick something I wrote on that and post it here again.

As for your other commentary am not dissagreeing with such. In fact, I am curious to learn more as it is my nature. In the end whether I'll agree who knows, time will tell.

In the end I respect your opinons and the information you endeavor to share none the less.

J

[cdsea10]

i have gleened so much here... on ucc discussions...
free_martha's holder in due course... accept for value...
traffic ticket... on and on. i love it. i have read ucc material other sites and the mysterious 72 hours is everywhere. since i hadn't uncovered its hiding place ... i thought i would ask... olie - olie - infree...

[CDTRUTH2]

I have not looked this up yet but I have been told personally by the court clerk at the window when I went to pay a ticket (this was before i knew what it really is) the very next day after I got it, that I could not pay it at that time because a contract(what they called the ticket)and she really did say" a contract takes three days to be enforced in this state". I did not understand that then so I waited to pay it. Now I know more and wow am I sorry I did. If any one could enlighten me on a few thing I could have or what they might have done given what they know now I would appreciate it alot thanks...CDTRUTH2 P.S. this is the only time I have ever witnessed someone wanting to pay a debit and them not accepting it. A red flag should have gone off in my mind but I guess I just let it go. It's time now to hold them accountable for their actions as well as uphold our rights and be accountable for our own actions and right of passage(travel). I know I went off the path a bit but it was on my mind at the time. I use to say if you don't like it sue me(but I am not !)be cause some of yall would ,could, & will end up winning from what I have read on here so far so I will just say thank you and peace to all....

[CDTRUTH2]

Originally Posted by CDTRUTH2

I have not looked this up yet but I have been told personally by the court clerk at the window when I went to pay a ticket (this was before i knew what it really is) the very next day after I got it, that I could not pay it at that time because a contract(what they called the ticket)and she really did say" a contract takes three days to be enforced in this state". I did not understand that then so I waited to pay it. Now I know more and wow am I sorry I did. If any one could enlighten me on a few thing I could have or what they might have done given what they know now I would appreciate it alot thanks...CDTRUTH2 P.S. this is the only time I have ever witnessed someone wanting to pay a debit and them not accepting it. A red flag should have gone off in my mind but I guess I just let it go. It's time now to hold them accountable for their actions as well as uphold our rights and be accountable for our own actions and right of passage(travel). I know I went off the path a bit but it was on my mind at the time. I use to say if you don't like it sue me(but I am not !)be cause some of yall would ,could, & will end up winning from what I have read on here so far so I will just say thank you and peace to all....

I am not sure if this really fits in with UCC, but UCC deals with contracts and this was a contract so I put it out there just for info sake. We all exchange ideas & experiences and this was one of my own.